Presidential debates have always been high-stakes affairs, but the latest ABC News debate has drawn sharp criticism, particularly from conservatives and some independent voices. What could have been an even-handed event quickly devolved into what many saw as a coordinated attack against GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, with both the moderators and Democrat presidential nominee Kamala Harris piling on in ways that raised eyebrows across the political spectrum.
Let’s break it down. One of the core criticisms leveled at the moderators revolves around fact-checking — or rather, selective fact-checking. Trump, known for his sharp and confrontational style, was repeatedly fact-checked during the debate. However, many of these fact-checks turned out to be flawed or outright false, casting doubt on the impartiality of the moderators.
Even more concerning was the abrupt rule change regarding microphone muting, which was apparently instituted just 30 minutes before the debate — and suspiciously aligned with a demand from the Harris campaign. To top it off, Harris was seemingly encouraged to join in on the critique of Trump, making the event feel more like a coordinated attack than a fair debate.
I said the reason for how the moderators behaved in the ABC debate was simply because they were not going to let happen to Kamala Harris, what happened to Joe Biden and here she is admitting ithttps://t.co/8uwshNkQl7 pic.twitter.com/x48TIQrz18
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) September 12, 2024
At the center of the storm is Linsey Davis, one of the co-moderators, who became a lightning rod for criticism after falsely fact-checking Trump on abortion. Rather than facing accountability for this misstep, Davis received glowing coverage from mainstream outlets like the LA Times, which published a piece praising her "fairness and balance."
But this narrative took a strange turn when Davis, during an interview with the Times, made a comment that many conservatives saw as a blatant admission of bias. She stated that the moderators' aggressive fact-checking of Trump was a response to the June CNN debate where Biden’s poor performance led to his exit from the race. The implication was clear: they didn’t want Harris to suffer the same fate as Biden.
In essence, Davis openly acknowledged that the moderators were keen to avoid a repeat of the CNN debacle, where Trump’s performance and Biden’s failure to defend himself hastened the latter's departure from the race. Her remarks suggest that the moderators took an overly aggressive stance against Trump to shield Harris from a similar political downfall.
This admission is hardly surprising to Trump’s supporters, who have long claimed that the debates are rigged against Republican candidates. Trump himself predicted the outcome, declaring ahead of time that there would be no more presidential debates after this one, calling out the bias he and his supporters have come to expect.
The fallout from Davis’ comments has been strangely muted. There’s no uproar from mainstream media, no calls for reform, and certainly no soul-searching from ABC News or Disney, the network’s parent company. It’s worth noting that the upper echelons of ABC News have cozy ties with Kamala Harris — one exec is even credited with introducing Harris to her now-husband, Doug Emhoff. Connections like this only fuel the perception that the debate stage is rigged, leaving voters wondering if fairness is still a priority in these high-profile political showdowns.